Euthanasia Right to Life vs Right to Die
Added on 2020-03-28
6 Pages1521 Words69 Views
|
|
|
Running Head: EUTHANASIA – WHY IT SHOULD BE ALLOWED1
![Euthanasia Right to Life vs Right to Die_1](/_next/image/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdesklib.com%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2Fir%2Fca039c5bb51945d2b581fec30f00733d.jpg&w=3840&q=10)
EUTHANASIA: WHY IT SHOULD BE ALLOWED2Human life is sacred. The western world is predominantly Christian and holds this view. However, questions have been come up about the right of people to die a dignified death, and whether the application ofassisted suicide, otherwise known as euthanasia, is unethical (Ekeke & Ikegbu, 2010). Sometimes it may be in the victim’s best interests to have their lives taken. They may be suffering from terminal illnesses which involve extreme suffering, with the medicalfield incapable of providing any remedy other than death (Annadurai, Danasekaran & Mani, 2014). In such situations, I believe that the person should be given the right to die, so that their suffering can be stopped, to stop the financial burden on the hospital and family,and to preserve the dignity of the dying person. Stopping the suffering Human beings are at liberty to chart their destiny. This is to the extent that they do not infringe on the rights of other people (Math, 2012). Terminally ill patients, including those suffering from advanced stages of cancer and AIDS, may sometimes feel that they deserve the right to a painless death, seeing that as things stand, the medical profession cannot offer them any respite from their troubles (Rathor, Rani & Shah, 2014). The wish should be granted. It willbe strictly within their rights to do so, and it will put them out of the heart-wrenching misery that these illnesses bring them. While ethical issues may be floated to object the primary rights of individuals to decide their own lives’ course, it is necessary to consider the reasoning behind taking one’s life, and why doctors, with their knowledge in the field, sometimes support the stance (Sinha, Basu & Sarkheel, 2012). Doctors have the responsibility of helping their clients either regain their health or depart with dignity. In the instance the doctor feels that the pain will continue without any remedy being available in the medical field, it should be possible to prescribe euthanasia (Sinha, Basu & Sarkheel, 2012). Agreeing to euthanasia does not mean that
![Euthanasia Right to Life vs Right to Die_2](/_next/image/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdesklib.com%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2Ftr%2F6d270e2b0b614c0d9bdf33df013148ba.jpg&w=3840&q=10)
EUTHANASIA: WHY IT SHOULD BE ALLOWED3the sanctity of life is not respected by the people involved. The ultimate decision of experience should include the direct input of the person who is the subject of the euthanasia, as well as their loved ones. The guiding reasoning should be that there are situations in which doctors cannot doanything to remedy the issues a patient has. Stop the financial burden on the hospital and familyTerminal illnesses present caregivers and the dying patient, together with their families, with a huge emotional and economic burden. In most cases, the person undergoing the existentialillness and irrepressible pain is also in dire financial straits. They can hardly afford to pay for the care they are receiving, due to having exhausted their savings, medical schemes and insurance, and even donations from well-wishers. Terminal care requires specialized treatment, with those who provide it charging a premium price to care for the patient. In some cases, the family is unable to take the patient home due to the delicate condition they are in, instead of being forced to put their lives on hold, and incurs substantial financial costs in the process, to care for their loved ones (Goel, 2008). This cost has a huge effect on their long-term financial well being, and generally, on the community they live in. This is another reason why euthanasia should be legalized. The parties described here spend large amounts of money – and other resources, takingcare of their loved ones and clients. In the end, they all understand that their efforts will do nothing more than lengthening the suffering of the patient. This should not be the case. Such resources could be better used in first ensuring that preventive responses to the conditions causing terminal illnesses are better prevented before the person reaches this phase (Strinic, 2015).
![Euthanasia Right to Life vs Right to Die_3](/_next/image/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdesklib.com%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2Fnk%2F4879051dbdc746ca89d19e88643f0965.jpg&w=3840&q=10)
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.
Related Documents
Patients should have the right to dielg...
|5
|626
|92
Legalization of euthanasia PDFlg...
|5
|817
|185
Legalization of Euthanasia - Issues and Argumentslg...
|5
|822
|395
Euthanasia: Ethical, Religious, and Practical Considerationslg...
|5
|971
|50
Health Ethicslg...
|4
|531
|147
Ethical Issues Presentation: Mercy Killinglg...
|10
|777
|79